The Pollinsider (unfortunate) Endorsement

A little less than a year ago I started this website, mostly to combine my obsessive-compulsive number disorder with my desire to help get Sarah Palin elected President. I had left the politics world several years ago in my mid-20s. I was a columnist for Townhall.com and wrote for a number of other magazines and conservative publications until I came to realize that politicians were politicians, no matter if they had a D or R next to their names. I quit, I got married, and I abandoned writing and politics altogether. Then Sarah Palin came along 2 years later and changed everything, my perception of politics and that one person could make a difference. I knew she was going to run. I could tell she had prepared. I had vetted all of the candidates in depth and realized no one could hold a candle to her. Her ethics. Her worldview. Her life. I created this website to dispel the popular Establishment theme that she could not win and to crunch the numbers to make a factual case. And then the headline popped up on the Drudge Report, and it was all over.

So here I am. I’ve spent the last two months debating myself (and friends here on the interwebs and on Twitter). I’ve played devil’s advocate. I’ve researched archives to find out as much as I could. I drifted to Cain, and thought “What the hell?” But his inability to answer… anything, was troublesome. He was a talk-show host for years an he was running for President, yet he couldn’t answer simple questions. He always said the wrong thing. He got tricked to easily. He issued to many corrections and clarifications. He said too often he would hire good people to answer stuff he didn’t know. He had no general vision.

Then I was stuck. Romney refused to renounce his horrible healthcare plan in Massachusetts. Newt is an egotistical narcissist, a Bush-Dole-McCain clone who debates better and wraps himself in the flag of a movement he always opposed. No executive experience. No business experience… other than the business of getting rich by promoting big government Republicanism. Santorum… Bachmann… Paul… minor fringe candidates who sing one note over and over. A bunch of legislators whose only accomplishments are how they voted one day three years ago, most of the time with 95% of their party anyway.

Then there was Perry. At first it was hard to get by the fact that he looked, sounded, and moved like George W. Bush. He had the personality of a rock, debate skills unworthy of a Junior Varsity squad, and a nasty attacking style. He seemed petty and vindictive.

So, with Palin gone, it became “Who best can defeat Barack Obama.” Newt says it repeatedly, and all of the candidates make the case that they are that candidate. Let’s be honest, most of the candidates agree with each other most of the time. They all want to get rid of Obamacare, make taxes lower/fairer, and help the economy. All the squabbling is about the candidates pasts, and them denying their pasts. As of today, they all basically have the same goals. Whether I believe any of them… well, there’s a reason I got out of politics in the first place. I don’t necessarily. But I would take any of them over Obama. But, alas, some have better chances at winning then others.

So, I looked at the things that conservatives always argue in favor of or things that were important to me (all of which Palin scored high marks on):

Executive Experience: That gives us Romney, Perry, and Huntsman.All with varying degrees of success, but none a failure.

Citizen-Politician: Cain is a prime example, and he’s not obsessed with running for office (just two attempts). I’d also say Bachmann fits in here, though she has been around for awhile here. Though many say Romney has been running for President his whole life, he was almost 50 the first time he ran for office, so not a lifetime politician. Perry and Gingrich have never lived away from government.

Business experience: Another win for Cain and Romney. Not so much for the rest.

Debate Skills: Gingrich and Romney both excel here. Bachmann does well at times. Santorum looks angry (and he gets pissed when you say that). Huntsman is a bore. And Paul is Paul.

Knowledge Base: Gingrich, Romney, Bachmann, and Santorum have the best grasp of issues. Cain is awful. Perry is average. Paul is… Paul.

Personal Life: This can’t be discounted. Team Obama is known for their ability to find dirt (even when it doesn’t exist), rip open divorce records, and to generally destroy people. Romney, Santorum, Huntsman, and Bachmann all seem to live normal, happy lives with normal families. Newt is an absolute mess. Between the messy divorce with wife #2 and the ways Newt has earned his millions since leaving office penniless, he is the biggest risk. Cain is a Question Mark.

Supports Tea Party Movement: Cain and Bachmann win here. Romney is afraid of looking “too conservative.” Newt opposed the tea Party ascension and their goals of turning back RINO’s.

Has Guts: Bachmann and Santorum are the most aggressive. Romney is the most Passive. Newt is both the most aggressive and most passive.

Ability to raise Money: Romney. He is the only one who has done it consistently. And it will take a war chest to defeat Obama, especially as Obama uses extra taxpayer money to campaign.

Has been Vetted: Cain, Bachmann, and Perry have all been fully vetted, hence their rise and fall from the polls. As the front-runner, Romney has also been thoroughly vetted, and honestly there is not much there as far as controversy is concerned. Newt is being vetted.

I attacked Romney frequently and often. But, I always thought he had perhaps the best shot at winning (even when I thought Palin was running, but she was worth the shot.) He has both business and executive experience. He also has RomneyCare. But he vigorously opposes Obamacare (and since the nation agrees with him, I am confident he will stomp it). He has a great family. I think he would be great for business, which is important in my life, and the lives of many of my friends and family members who are suffering in this economy and with life under Obama. He is unpopular, but people are willing to vote for him. He leads or ties Obama in many all the important states, even when the voters don’t much care for him (Same can’t be said about any of the other candidates). He has the greatest ability to woo conservative Reagan Democrats and Independents, perhaps in part because he has been attacked so much by Conservatives, often rightfully so (but perhaps to an over-the-top degree). He looks like a President (and as some joke, could play one on TV). I won’t defend his past policies, because I can’t. I understand the political expediency of running as a liberal in Massachusetts. I also understand the political expediency of wrapping one’s self in the Tea Party flag as others have done, but being a fraud. But to also be fair, when it would have been easy, popular, and perhaps even politically smart for Romney to reject his Mass healthcare plan, he refuses to do so. So, maybe he isn’t all just politics. I even like the way Romney debates. he is solid and he doesn’t make mistakes. When Romney and Perry were pitted against each other in debates, he always came out looking better. And I think Obama would more-so take the place of Perry in the “nasty” regard.

At the end of the day I am afraid for my son and my soon-to-be child and their futures if Obama get’s re-elected. I don’t think it is worth the risk of going with a candidate who is simply the “Anti-Romney,” when that candidate may be little better politically and have little chance of winning. I understand the concept of voting principles, but none of the candidate’s cut it for me in that regard anyway.

So, there it is. I will vote for Romney and I will urge my friends to vote the same way. I can think of no single event more devastating than the re-election of Barack Obama, a President with no regard for the law or the legislative process. A president who makes things up as he goes along. I wan’t him defeated in November of 2012.I might be called a “RINO.” I will get messages about his policies, and like I said I won’t defend them. I will probably say “Yeah, the dude sucks.” And yes, I am voting electability over principles, and to vote principle I would be writing a candidate in who doesn’t want to run.

I am also completely open to a 2016 Primary Challenge. if Romney wins and falters, falls back on his promises, gets sucked into progressivism, I will gladly welcome a challenge to him from the right. Even if he does a good job, I might still be supportive of a better candidate. My priority now is singular: “Making Barack Obama a ONE TERM PRESIDENT!” Hahaha, get it? So I will hope…

Romney-Rubio?

Romney-Ryan?

Romney-West?

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

It’s been a rough couple of months for me since Sarah announced that she was not running. Prior to that, there was no reason to personally vet any of the other candidates beyond my general knowledge of them, which was relatively good, as I’m a political junkie.

I have been floundering since then, just knowing one thing for sure. Whoever the nominee turns out to be will get my vote, against Obama, period.

Though it pains my Sarah Palin Conservatives soul to say so, I can’t fault your logic on Romney, from a pragmatic perspective.

At one point I had convinced myself that I would vote my principles in the Primary, and vote pragmatically in the General. That would have narrowed my Primary vote to Santorum or Bachmann, and the General election vote to the winning nominee. However, I’ve always suspected that if enough people split the vote on their principles, Romney would end up the nominee, anyway.

I have a private, Sarah supporters, site, of like minded Conservatives who appreciate your take on issues and your polling style. I post your thoughts as you send them out, as I will this blog. We’ve moved on to dealing with the new reality…and are all floundering and trying to help each other with info and sympathy.

If you’d like to check the site out, contact me by my email address and I’ll send you an invitation. It’s a good group of Conservative Patriots, and no damn trolls, as it’s private.

My God, I could use your therapeutic blog/website as well!! Puleeze! Send me an invitation!! My email is jdbresumes@aol.com (one of my other emails is ca4palin@aol.com, but, by intention, it’s been inactive for the past couple of weeks…). Also, I was a regional coordinator (hahaha – past & unfulfilled glory!) for O4P CA – and, boy, was I ever ready for the action (that, sadly, never happened)! Like you and your ePals, I’m still dealing with the loss – and not sure which stage, in the 7-stages dealing with grief & loss, that I’m at, at this point in time, but I do need help & succor… Thank you!!

I have long read and appreciated your analyses and articles. I understand how you feel – and your biggest fear – which I share. It’s just I still see no candidate that comes close to Sarah. As for Romney – I am not sure he can garner enough strong support and interest to get people out to vote, especially after McCain.

Guess I am still praying….for a miracle……..and, yet, at some point, if required, I will hold my nose and vote….though how and why our leaders let this imposter in to begin with will always be a question in my mind.

I completely agree. I have largely become a watcher of this primary season once Palin left the field. And am hugely disappointed at what is left on the field. All i care about at this point is that Obama is defeated next year and i will vote for anyone but Obama.

I wonder though why Palin decided not to run. The conspiracist in me says she knew Romney was inevitably the winner given the political machinery of the Republican party. If so, I hope she consider running as a 3rd party candidate in 2016.

I, too, try to see a viable future for Palin – and, IMHO, it ain’t with the GOP!! Even if they win (and, please God, let that be so!) with Romney, the Party infrastructure as it is and the generally corrupt old bastards that still run the show (and try to control their shrinking base!) have convinced me that the only REAL life left is for Conservatives and Tea Partiers to either completely hijack the GOP or, more constructively, form a NEW party the day after the Nov. 2012 election is over! If Sarah and others of her ilk took that path, I would throw in with her – and others – for that more noble purpose. It’s time for the GOP to join the Whigs in the political graveyard of American political parties that no longer exist…

Bottom line, however, is for Palin to assume a leadership role in whichever direction she senses is most likely to succeed. If it IS to re-energize SarahPAC for victories in the 2014 Congressional election cycle, then so be it; and if THAT’s successful, she’ll have a very strong base from which to launch her 2016 big for POTUS, ’cause I think that NO GOP “winner”/POTUS will be able to undo the amount of damage necessary to renew our Great American Experiment – and it will/would take a Palin to accelerate that process.

PollInsider;
I have read and appreciated the content and tone of this your weblog. When everybody was trying to con anybody in the sphere of political news and views, your take has been refreshing.
So do not despair of your role!
I want to comment on the US primary situation, as a half-American Canadian observer. I don’t intend to irritate, but likely will.
Americans in general are inordinately attached to the spectacles of shooting stars – up they go, down they come, back they come later with renovated shticks. Now what sort of star is that to follow so hopefully? So naively?
Let me mention a familiar alternative. Not long ago the Canadian electorate dumped most of the liberal leftists to ‘elect’ a federal leader best described as a dullish economist, conservative but pragmatically centrist, who has gradually forced the leftists further leftward and out of electoral favor. And things haven’t been better here since, oh, about the giddy time of Trudeaumania.
Americans still have much the same option in Rick Santorum, and had much the same in Sarah Palin. She was politically crucified; he is politically ignored (for lack of flash). The Tea Party Movement which once bragged about its non-leadership has lost its Palin lodestar and now wallows in despair. It is hung up on the ancient spiritual dilemma: between hope for salvation and fear of abandonment. It’s in a sort of political paralysis.
I’ve just read that we learn only from our mistakes, that we don’t learn anything from getting it right. So I am wondering just when, actually, America-in-general is going to start learning from its mistakes. (Obamamania is a marvelous teacher, as Trudeaumania was here!)